fs100 new e-mount lenses? suggestions, ideas, thoughts, rambling...

Nirv said:
I haven't used the Alpha Zeiss lenses to know if they have better manual controls but they're a bit too heavy for me (and expensive).
Click to expand...

They're nicer than most AF lenses. The rings have about 120 degrees of travel, they have soft stops - you hit the end with a stop but the ring will continue moving which is useful for not putting too much torque on the lens mount with an over zealous FF. However they are focus-by-wire and you can feel and tell that.

But they're not MF lenses which feel completely different

cheers
paul
 
Nirv said:
I'd settle for a constant 3.5 or 4 parfocal manual 28-135 or there abouts.
Click to expand...

To me 28 is no good Id want 18 (or as fuiji have compromised with 19 for good tech reasons no doubt - witness their size mass advantage over the arri LWZ)

To me a zoom is a sequence lens - cook chopping veg.. - Shot one GV, Shot 2 Hands , Shot 3 Face, Shot 4 Hands and Face, thats 18, 70, 70, 35

At the moment I pump this out with 18prime, change, 35-70 zoom

Im very happy to refocus so dont need parfocual, in fact it doesnt even need to be a zoom it could be a 'multi prime' (my new expression!) as per the leica 16-18-21 which wont shoot at 19 for example, http://www.robertwhite.co.uk/leica-16-18-21mm-f4-tri-elmar-6-bit-black-lens.html

28 would of course be great on a Fullframe sensor - where there are 24-XX offeringss from canikon and 28-xx from other makers

Im confused that it is possible to make a 24-105 yet 'hard' to make this, I think its because Canikon think that 'APS' is an amateur size and wont place a $4k lens there - its possible but the marketeers dont see it - I dont really see anything else!

Constant ap doesnt really bother me either - as long as (unlike the FS100/Kit lens) it doesnt take a week to dial in the new setting with a control positioned.. somewhere random

and yes I want to shoot into the light with it :)

s
 
Last edited:
morgan_moore said:
Im very happy to refocus so dont need parfocual,
Click to expand...

Hmmm, above all things parfocal is the highest thing up my list. Zoom in, pinch up focus then you're set for the whole scene. It's the one thing I miss and old habits are dying hard. This varifocal world I find myself in is blooming strange.
 
Thats most certainly an after market "solution". But that is half assed made. Not in build quality, but in development quality and design functionality. Again, I must say, this is 2012.. not 2007 with the hvx and 35mm adapters and crazy light loss. I want to see a camera like the sony fs100/700 (more like the 700 since its going to be the future right around the corner) and it needs to have a detachable E mount auto/manual servo lens with low aperture that can answer to event and wedding film makers. 14mm-200mm with F 1.4 at lowest and F2.8 at highest.. Or just a constant F2.8 Theres a way!...

Oh, and it has to be built sturdy.
 
corycross said:
half assed .. crazy light loss.
Click to expand...

Spread the light gathered by the lens over a bigger (sensor) area and the intensity per unit area drops - damn physics again messing up the program

The only way to get more light in is by having a bigger front element and you dont want a bigger front than the fuijis 114mm
 
Last edited:
For instance.

Sony came out with the fs100 for event film makers.. But they did not put in nd filters, nor did they add dual card slots (not a big deal to me), its great it has the option for the recording unit (which I also have and it works great) but even the Sony nx5 camera has dual slots and a place for the recording unit. And it has ND filters. Which came out before the fs100.

Then people said, oh well its impossible to put nd filters on the fs100, but now the fs700 has them. walla

NOW, I AM RAMBLING.. I'm done for now about that stuff, I just feel if any company was really looking to give customers, clients, film makers what they really need, it would be so. Because right now, its just plain teasing.

Is there a solution to have your cake and eat it to? Like, maybe stop making crappy products and trying to make it work with camcorders that do not deserve those crappy products? And they aren't crappy, but compared to consumer and professional and putting that consumer product on a camera body thats work $5-$8Grand. All of the e-mount lenses (besides 1, the 24mm lens from Zeiss) are made for consumers and not thought about for the professionals.
 
You know, when I first bought the fs100, I could not believe how good the low light was compared to the 7D. I had a 30mm 1.4 lens on the FS100, filming inside a room with 1 window and the picture was completey over exposed at 1/50th, 24fps. I had to use ND filters so I could expose properly.. a variable ND.

So, I get what you mean a lot of light is going to be on the larger sensor.. The only solution would then be ND filters in a matte box, variable NDs, or using a fs700 with built in nds. But I like having the option of having a scene being totally over exposed, so I can expose correctly with the camera. I've found that helpful for filming weddings and documentaries.

Right now, the largest lens I use is a canon 70-200 f2.8 and the lens is huge. The z7u lens is bigger, but just by a little.

morgan_moore said:
Spread the light gathered by the lens over a bigger (sensor) area and the intensity per unit area drops - damn physics again messing up the program

The only way to get more light in is by having a bigger front element and you dont want a bigger front than the fuijis 114mm
Click to expand...
 
In term of spreading the light I was refering to that lens converter and explaing the reason for loss in stop

Yep a big chip catches a lot of light the iso performance is astounding - but to some extent that is traded off against not being able to gget lenses that are as fast - unless they are bucket sized

Have you seen a 200 2.8 - yep you own one - a 200/2 is a lot bigger for ons stop its 124mm at the font compared to 77 http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/200f2.htm

S
 
haha oh wow, thats pretty cool. I remember hearing about that before and I didn't take that into account, but now it sunk in this time around. Thanks for sharing that Morgan!

morgan_moore said:
In term of spreading the light I was refering to that lens converter and explaing the reason for loss in stop

Yep a big chip catches a lot of light the iso performance is astounding - but to some extent that is traded off against not being able to gget lenses that are as fast - unless they are bucket sized

Have you seen a 200 2.8 - yep you own one - a 200/2 is a lot bigger for ons stop its 124mm at the font compared to 77 http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/200f2.htm

S
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top